Navigating Quiet Ambition in the Workplace

The emergence of ‘quiet ambition’ among young workers, dominated by Gen Z, is an interesting issue to explore. This is because young people constitute a large proportion of the overall productive workforce in Indonesia.

If, in the past, the ‘hustle culture’ was a popular work culture that was glorified by many as a symbol of success, ambition and dedication, today this trend is being abandoned by new entrants to the workforce.

In other words, there is a 180-degree shift in attitude among young workers, from embracing a work culture that pushes individuals beyond their capacity and abilities, towards ‘quiet ambition’.

Although, at first glance, it may seem similar, ‘quiet ambition’ has a different meaning from ‘quiet quitting’. ‘Quiet quitting’ is a work attitude that is based on the principle of ‘doing just enough’. ‘Quiet quitters’ can be seen in employees who, when carrying out their work, only fulfill their obligations.

Their work behavior is passive, only completing the essential tasks that are required of them, without taking extra initiative. Although it does not necessarily mean violating the rules, employees with these characteristics do not make an optimal contribution to the organization. The drive they have is not dedicated to making a greater contribution to the work they do.

Meanwhile, according to Yikilmaz (2023), ‘quiet ambition’ can be interpreted as a work attitude in which employees focus not only on achieving organizational goals, but also on achieving their personal goals, well-being and dreams.

‘Quiet ambition’ employees tend not to explicitly express their ambitions and pursue positions within the organization they work for. They still have a hidden desire to achieve a goal, but without wanting to reveal it.

Thus, the significant difference between these two concepts (‘quiet quitting’ and ‘quiet ambition’) lies in whether or not the employee has a desire to grow and contribute more to their workplace. If so, then the employee is a ‘quiet ambition’ employee; if not, then the employee is more likely to be experiencing what is called ‘quiet quitting’.

As mentioned earlier, ‘quiet ambition’ employees are more focused on personal growth, without having to compete with others using the standards set by the organization they work for.

Forbes, in October 2023, discussed a study conducted by Visier, a human resources (HR) analytics company, on 1,000 workers in the United States. The results of the study revealed that only 38% of workers are interested in becoming leaders in the organization they work for, while 62% prefer to remain employees without taking on managerial responsibilities.

This trend reflects a reality that the world of work, including the public sector, needs to face, that some employees have different goals. With an increasing number of employees choosing to define success in a more personal way, the organizations they work for will be influenced by the motivations of their employees.

This is not limited to achieving a particular position, but rather the satisfaction that is subjectively defined by the employees.

In the field of human resource management, the phenomenon of ‘quiet ambition’ can be explained, among other things, using Self Determination Theory (SDT) developed by Deci and Ryan (1985). In this theory, Deci and Ryan argue that individual workers have intrinsic motivation when their psychological needs are met.

The three basic universal psychological needs are (1) autonomy, which means that each person has control over their own choices and actions; (2) competence, the desire to feel capable, skilled and successful in facing professional challenges; and (3) relatedness, the need to feel that their work is meaningful and has an impact.

Within this SDT framework, an employee’s ambition is not lost or measured by status, but rather transforms into an ambition based on the desire to improve personal capacity for internal satisfaction.

However, in the context of bureaucracy and the public sector, intrinsic motivation alone is not enough to study and build employee orientation. This gap is then filled and complemented by Public Service Motivation (PSM), which provides a new dimension to the discussion of public service satisfaction.

Perry & Wise (1990) argue that PSM explains that individuals who work in the public sector are driven by values of service, such as commitment as citizens, commitment to the public interest, empathy and sacrificing personal interests for the public interest. For employees with high PSM, work is a form of moral responsibility, not just an instrument for earning a living or seeking a position.

When SDT and PSM meet in an individual worker, the employee’s ambition changes direction, not just to pursue a position, but to pursue competence and impact on the public. Employees still want to develop competence, but it is rooted in intrinsic motivation and a commitment to providing excellent public service, not just for the sake of self-promotion.

Quiet Ambition in the Civil Service

In the context of the civil service, ‘quiet ambition’ is like a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this phenomenon can create potential strength if managed well. Leaders in the organization need to see that ‘quiet ambition’ can reduce the dynamics of political positions because employees focus on the quality of their work.

Another advantage of this phenomenon is that it creates a higher level of organizational resilience to transactional culture.